Prudential S'pore insurance agent claims he got fired after whistleblowing company, ordered to pay S$120,000 after losing appeal - Mothership

His wrongful termination suit against Prudential was previously dismissed by the court.

After seeing what he deemed misleading life insurance advertisements on social media by members of his company, an insurance agent in Prudential Singapore decided to report the matter to the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) under an alias.

He then filed a lawsuit against his former company, was dismissed, appealed, and was overturned again.

The man was eventually ordered to pay over S$120,000 in legal fees.

See Jen Sen was an agent, associate manager and agency leader at Prudential for 19 years, according to a judgement paper of his suit against the company.

In October 2020, See, then a Financial Services Director, came across advertisements for life insurance on social media by representatives of Prudential and third parties.

He believed these were not in compliance with MAS' advertising guidelines and raised his concerns with his company's compliance team.

Five days later, he also wrote to Prudential's then-CEO, who referred him to the Chief Risk Officer.

Three months of investigations yielded no result.

On Jan. 7, 2021, See contacted the CEO again, who responded after four days. See then offered some proposals, but these received no response.

Between May 10, 2021 and Oct. 18, 2021, he reported the purported breaches to MAS 13 times under the pseudonym "Patrick Goh".

See was issued a termination notice on Mar. 7, 2022.

According to the judgement paper, he was given 14 days' notice.

He then sued Prudential for wrongful termination, claiming that the dismissal was due to him being a whistleblower, and a breach of "good faith, mutual trust, confidence and goodwill" in his employment contract.

long-term incentives and 72 months of team commissions.

However, Prudential argued that the termination was within its contractual right to terminate with notice.

It added that See was not entitled to the reward scheme as he was no longer an employee at the time of payment, and another of his application for a scheme was invalid.

Prudential also lodged a countersuit against See, as it claimed that See did not lodge his complaints through the proper channels laid out by the company.

See's wrongful termination suit and Prudential's countersuit were dismissed by the High Court on Nov. 10, 2025.

See's claim that his ex-company had fired him as "retaliation" for his whistleblowing to MAS was found by the judge to lack basis.

However, Prudential's claim that See had ignored company guidelines was also found to be void, as there was evidence that See had attempted on multiple occasions to use internal channels as per the guidelines, such as sending an email to the CEO more than once.

He had only contacted MAS after receiving no replies. Prudential's counterclaim was therefore dismissed.

Nonetheless, See was ordered to pay over S$80,000 in legal costs, according to Shin Min Daily News.

He appealed this ruling, but was dismissed and ordered to pay another S$40,000 in legal fees.